Senator Reid Wants To Tax Our Guns
BY Herschel Smith11 years, 8 months ago
In the spirit of my previous observations, where I commented “there are only two reasons for a national gun registry: taxation and confiscation,” Senator Reid has rammed through proposed legislation to do just that.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) wants to tax your gun rights. His new legislation charges you a fee that is in essence a federal tax on selling or giving away your firearm, and he lets Attorney General Eric Holder decide how big that tax will be.
Senate Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, and Barbara Boxer of California have introduced a raft of gun control legislation (S. 374, S. 54, and S. 146, respectively). Senator Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, rammed the legislation through committee in record time—not even bothering to issue the customary committee reports to explain the bills—and Reid combined the bills into a single gun control bill (S. 649). Firearms owners across the country and others who care about their right to keep and bear arms should keep a close eye on the Reid legislation. Your rights are under attack.
[ … ]
Title I of the Reid gun control bill purports to “fix gun checks.” The proposed “fix” in section 122 of S. 649 is to take away an individual’s right to sell or give away a firearm to another individual unless, in most cases, the individual (1) uses a licensed importer, dealer, or manufacturer to make the transfer of the firearm and (2) pays a fee to that importer, dealer, or manufacturer to make the transfer. The individual transferring the firearm is not actually receiving a service; the federal government is receiving the service. The service the government gets is a background check on the intended recipient of the firearm, because the law requires the importer, dealer, or manufacturer to run the recipient through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Forcing the individual to pay for the government-mandated service, which is in fact a service to the government, is in essence a federal tax on the individual. And the amount the individual pays as a fee is not limited by the legislation; section 122(a)(4) of the Reid bill enacts a new section 922(t)(4)(B)(i) of title 18 of the U.S. Code to grant to Attorney General Eric Holder the power to set the maximum fee by regulation.
Thus he gets it all – a national gun registry, almost omniscient state knowledge of the whereabouts of firearms for legal owners, and taxation of our property. And on top of that, Eric Holder gets to set the fee schedule. Again as I have observed, so-called assault weapons are irrelevant to the progressive. A national gun registry is the touchstone of success.
What could possibly go wrong? Their only mistake is in assuming that gun owners will willingly acquiesce to this tyranny. On that account, this might not turn out like Reid had hoped.
On April 1, 2013 at 8:50 pm, scott s. said:
The way the bill reads (to me anyway) in an unlicenced-to-unlicensed transfer, the gun has to go on the FFL’s bound book. So both the transferor and transferee info have to be entered, as well as transferee having to do a 4473. And if the transferee gets a “deny” from NICS, the transferor will have to do a 4473/NICS to get the gun back.
On April 1, 2013 at 9:37 pm, bubba said:
They have the starting whistle perched in their mouth and they don’t even know it. Closer, closer, closer; times running out.
On April 2, 2013 at 9:36 pm, dad29 said:
Going nowhere. When Boehner brings it up in the House (and the Tanned One WILL do that), it will not pass.